Susaga @ Susaga @ttrpg.network

Posts

2

Comments

276

Joined

2 yr. ago

When I was playing that game as a youngling, someone asked me to help get some wine from a cult temple. I did, which made the door slam shut and every cultist in the room attack me. I just barely made it out of there alive.

Then they told me to go get a second one. Yeah, they didn't need wine, they wanted me to die to a trap so they could take my stuff without killing me.

I'm embarrassed to say I actually went to get that second wine.

Ironically for a post complaining about reading comprehension, but you misrepresented the original post you're talking about. Even have the classic "quotation marks around a thing that was never said" in the title.

First, and perhaps most obvious, this wasn't "everyone". This was one person, and they didn't get many upvotes. When I recommend a TTRPG, for example, I'm recommending Genesys (like someone else did).

Second, they weren't saying to homebrew old editions of D&D. They were saying you don't need to homebrew at all. At most, they said you could reflavour something in 4th edition. Their entire point was that you don't need to homebrew when you can just find a system that already has what you would have homebrewed in.

Third, they were suggesting this as an alternative to homebrewing specific material into D&D 5e. Pathfinder can provide the experience of "5e with time travel" that you wanted without any modifications. BitD is so different from 5e that it can't.

You are, however, correct that they did backtrack. I'll put this down to poorly explaining their argument to start with, as they downplayed the "5e but better" games in their first comment while that was really their entire point.

Personally, I like homebrewing. It's fun to tinker with the rules and materials. But there's also an argument to not repeat work someone else has already done.

Is that what inspired the movie?

You said it was pushing minors and transgenderism, and you shy away from that as a christian. All too often, "pushing transgenderism" just means acknowledging the reality that they exist, and putting it in the same group as "pushing minors" creates a very disturbing equivelance. And I don't know why you'd shy from trans representation as a christian, given how the bible doesn't say a damn thing about trans people.

Why would you start reading something called Zombie Land Saga where the main character becomes a zombie almost instantly if you weren't into zombification? You had plenty of warning signs.

And why did you lump transgenderism in with minors? They aren't remotely similar, and it's worrying you seem to think they are.

Nah, the genre is targeted towards teen boys. So the hero is a generically nice person with no skills or social experience. His "useless" ability is actually a super-powerful skill that makes him a hero. All the girls fall for him because he's a nicer person than some other people in the setting, even if he does buy them as slaves. And any bullies enemies the protagonist has are easily defeated in a single move.

In some settings, the super-powerful ability is knowledge of the setting, so the hero has amazing powers due to being a nerd who likes fantasy stories. Like you, the reader!

And right at the start, the hero finds out there is an afterlife.

I guess it depends on how Konsi feels about garlic bread.

I feel like it's accurate to say Texas is completely Texas.

I'm living under a conservative government, so I can't make any promises on that toast. But I would like to, yes.

Given how you say it's happening across 43 states, I should point out I'll be in Britain.

Also, you're just saying "lets do something" and not saying what you'll actually do. Your scale is spread thin and your talking points are empty cliches. In the end, you will do nothing.

Edit: Called it.

Human centipede economics.

I think OP might have a skewed opinion of the centre.

Bathos. That's Bathos. Interrupting something serious to ridicule it. It's been a trope since the 18th century, and it's definitely not just a "leftist" trope. It's also NOT the only type of joke in left-wing media, or the only types of jokes in those specific movies. Most of Deadpool is pop culture references, for example.

Care to give an example of a movie that does this?

Ah, the common paradox. Nobody wants to listen to Nickelback because it's overplayed, and nobody drives in New York because of all the traffic.

Scenario 1: It's your radio. Turn to a different station.
Scenario 2: It's a friend's radio. Ask them to turn to a different station.
Scenario 3: It's a public radio. Just zone out for three minutes.

And on the subject of not getting to choose the songs, what station is choosing to play 20 year old songs by a band it's a meme to hate?

First, this was never about your opinion. It was about an article that complained about music being used in advertising, songs being popular, and people being inspired by a band. That was the opinion you cited as a good reason to hate them.

Second, how often does that actually happen? Considering it's an internet meme to shit on them, how often do people cite Nickelback as their main example of rock ahead of, say, Nirvana?

Third, why is it disgusting that people mention a band you dislike? Can you not simply correct them and suggest the bands you ACTUALLY like? Does it have to be "hate" rather than "I'm not a fan"?

Fourth, how the hell did Nickelback ruin rock? Is rock so fragile that the Eagles can't be enjoyed because of "How you remind me" existing? There are bands far worse than Nickelback, but they aren't successful so you don't care. If Nickelback weren't as successful, you wouldn't care about them either.

...But you don't have to listen to it. If it's on the radio, change the station. The complaints in the article were WAY too in depth for a casual listener to make.

Why would you hate someone for making music you don't enjoy? Why hate someone for making money with a successful product? Why not just... Ignore them? You are under no obligation to like them, but there's only around three arguments in there to actually hate them. There are more arguments in that article that boil down to "it's successful, so it sucks" than valid criticism.

Holy fuck, that article is elitist. Half of the sections seem pointlessly mean, like they're trying to dunk on them to win popularity points. One of them is just insulting Chad Kroeger for marrying Avril Lavigne, as if a 10+ year marriage is a bad thing. Some valid points buried in there, but the credibility is lost.